Cargando…

An Outcome-based Approach for the Creation of Fetal Growth Standards: Do Singletons and Twins Need Separate Standards?

Contemporary fetal growth standards are created by using theoretical properties (percentiles) of birth weight (for gestational age) distributions. The authors used a clinically relevant, outcome-based methodology to determine if separate fetal growth standards are required for singletons and twins....

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Joseph, K. S., Fahey, John, Platt, Robert W., Liston, Robert M., Lee, Shoo K., Sauve, Reg, Liu, Shiliang, Allen, Alexander C., Kramer, Michael S.
Formato: Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Oxford University Press 2009
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2640160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19126584
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwn374
_version_ 1782164534893477888
author Joseph, K. S.
Fahey, John
Platt, Robert W.
Liston, Robert M.
Lee, Shoo K.
Sauve, Reg
Liu, Shiliang
Allen, Alexander C.
Kramer, Michael S.
author_facet Joseph, K. S.
Fahey, John
Platt, Robert W.
Liston, Robert M.
Lee, Shoo K.
Sauve, Reg
Liu, Shiliang
Allen, Alexander C.
Kramer, Michael S.
author_sort Joseph, K. S.
collection PubMed
description Contemporary fetal growth standards are created by using theoretical properties (percentiles) of birth weight (for gestational age) distributions. The authors used a clinically relevant, outcome-based methodology to determine if separate fetal growth standards are required for singletons and twins. All singleton and twin livebirths between 36 and 42 weeks’ gestation in the United States (1995–2002) were included, after exclusions for missing information and other factors (n = 17,811,922). A birth weight range was identified, at each gestational age, over which serious neonatal morbidity and neonatal mortality rates were lowest. Among singleton males at 40 weeks, serious neonatal morbidity/mortality rates were lowest between 3,012 g (95% confidence interval (CI): 3,008, 3,018) and 3,978 g (95% CI: 3,976, 3,980). The low end of this optimal birth weight range for females was 37 g (95% CI: 21, 53) less. The low optimal birth weight was 152 g (95% CI: 121, 183) less for twins compared with singletons. No differences were observed in low optimal birth weight by period (1999–2002 vs. 1995–1998), but small differences were observed for maternal education, race, parity, age, and smoking status. Patterns of birth weight-specific serious neonatal morbidity/neonatal mortality support the need for plurality-specific fetal growth standards.
format Text
id pubmed-2640160
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2009
publisher Oxford University Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-26401602009-02-25 An Outcome-based Approach for the Creation of Fetal Growth Standards: Do Singletons and Twins Need Separate Standards? Joseph, K. S. Fahey, John Platt, Robert W. Liston, Robert M. Lee, Shoo K. Sauve, Reg Liu, Shiliang Allen, Alexander C. Kramer, Michael S. Am J Epidemiol Original Contributions Contemporary fetal growth standards are created by using theoretical properties (percentiles) of birth weight (for gestational age) distributions. The authors used a clinically relevant, outcome-based methodology to determine if separate fetal growth standards are required for singletons and twins. All singleton and twin livebirths between 36 and 42 weeks’ gestation in the United States (1995–2002) were included, after exclusions for missing information and other factors (n = 17,811,922). A birth weight range was identified, at each gestational age, over which serious neonatal morbidity and neonatal mortality rates were lowest. Among singleton males at 40 weeks, serious neonatal morbidity/mortality rates were lowest between 3,012 g (95% confidence interval (CI): 3,008, 3,018) and 3,978 g (95% CI: 3,976, 3,980). The low end of this optimal birth weight range for females was 37 g (95% CI: 21, 53) less. The low optimal birth weight was 152 g (95% CI: 121, 183) less for twins compared with singletons. No differences were observed in low optimal birth weight by period (1999–2002 vs. 1995–1998), but small differences were observed for maternal education, race, parity, age, and smoking status. Patterns of birth weight-specific serious neonatal morbidity/neonatal mortality support the need for plurality-specific fetal growth standards. Oxford University Press 2009-03-01 2009-01-06 /pmc/articles/PMC2640160/ /pubmed/19126584 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwn374 Text en American Journal of Epidemiology Published by Oxford University Press 2009. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.0/uk/) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Contributions
Joseph, K. S.
Fahey, John
Platt, Robert W.
Liston, Robert M.
Lee, Shoo K.
Sauve, Reg
Liu, Shiliang
Allen, Alexander C.
Kramer, Michael S.
An Outcome-based Approach for the Creation of Fetal Growth Standards: Do Singletons and Twins Need Separate Standards?
title An Outcome-based Approach for the Creation of Fetal Growth Standards: Do Singletons and Twins Need Separate Standards?
title_full An Outcome-based Approach for the Creation of Fetal Growth Standards: Do Singletons and Twins Need Separate Standards?
title_fullStr An Outcome-based Approach for the Creation of Fetal Growth Standards: Do Singletons and Twins Need Separate Standards?
title_full_unstemmed An Outcome-based Approach for the Creation of Fetal Growth Standards: Do Singletons and Twins Need Separate Standards?
title_short An Outcome-based Approach for the Creation of Fetal Growth Standards: Do Singletons and Twins Need Separate Standards?
title_sort outcome-based approach for the creation of fetal growth standards: do singletons and twins need separate standards?
topic Original Contributions
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2640160/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19126584
http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwn374
work_keys_str_mv AT josephks anoutcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT faheyjohn anoutcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT plattrobertw anoutcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT listonrobertm anoutcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT leeshook anoutcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT sauvereg anoutcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT liushiliang anoutcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT allenalexanderc anoutcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT kramermichaels anoutcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT josephks outcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT faheyjohn outcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT plattrobertw outcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT listonrobertm outcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT leeshook outcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT sauvereg outcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT liushiliang outcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT allenalexanderc outcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards
AT kramermichaels outcomebasedapproachforthecreationoffetalgrowthstandardsdosingletonsandtwinsneedseparatestandards